Appendix C: Self-Study Questionnaire Responses

Partnership for the Coastal Environment

1. List the active faculty participating in the Partnership. How has this changed over time?

Active faculty who participate on the steering committee: Arthur Gold, David Bengtson, Stephen Swallow, Candace Oviatt, Michael Rice, Virginia Lee, Barbara Sullivan-Watts, Deborah Grossman-Garber. The attrition has been relatively minor. Bill Gordon and Tim Tyrell both have been unable to participate actively for the past couple of years. We are currently seeking representation from Marine Biology and Biology to round out our scope. We currently have approximately 60 active faculty, staff and agency professionals who weave our Coastal Fellows into their vertically integrated research and outreach teams.

2. List the annual number of research papers and presentations made associated with Partnership activities. Do Not list each citation, but just the number of papers or presentations.

Number of papers and presentations: Dozens, in every conceivable venue, both on research, outreach, and on the educational paradigm we are promoting.

3. What external funding has resulted from Partnership activities? Give examples of any funding that was directly linked to the Partnership.

External funding through 1999 is detailed in our self-report, on file in the Research Office. If I had to hazard a guess at this point, I would estimate that somewhere between $6-7 million in funding has been brought in as a result of Partnership activities and associations, perhaps more. Since the proposals go through departments and not through the partnerships, this number is a bit difficult to track.

4. Give examples of how the Partnership activities are or will be self-sustaining? For those Partnerships that no longer receive funding from URI, has this objective been met? How? For those Partnerships still receiving URI funding, what is the plan to become self-supporting? For both groups, what is the management plan for self-support?

Self-sustaining: As long as we are unable to access a return on the overhead we bring in or get direct credit for the student credit hours that we generate, we will never be self-sustaining as a partnership. Additionally, the Coastal Fellows Program requires institutional support as match in order to continue drawing external federal funds. We have agonized as a group for a number of years about creating a sustainable alliance. We see no way to do this without changing certain university assumptions and structures.

5. How have Partnership activities affected faculty workload? Give examples.

Coastal Partnership activities have been entirely on faculty OVERLOAD. We did not use funds to release partnership faculty from teaching. In retrospect, we should have provided the time to allow partnership folks to create and to blend their research activities.

6. What new courses have been created from the result of the Partnership? List the enrollment in these courses.

New courses:

a. Interdisciplinary Topics in the Coastal Environment: NRS, MAF, REN, ASP, FST 388 (Spring) 40-50 students each year

b. Communication of Scientific Research and Outreach: NRS, MAF, REN, ASP, FST 366 (Fall) 25-30 student each year

c. Undergraduate Research Apprenticeship Opportunities in various departments: e.g. NRS 395

d. Overall, twelve different partnership colloquia, courses, and seminars have been developed and taught to approximately 320 students.

A direct outgrowth of the Partnership is the new Experiential Learning Initiative in the College of the Environment and Life Sciences, aimed at encouraging curriculum revision in all departments to include a substantial component of hands-on, experiential learning in the major.

We have generated approximately 1500 student credit hours through the Coastal Fellowship Program.

7. How many undergraduate students and how many graduate students have participated in the Partnership? How many of the publications and presentations listed in question 2 have had student co-authors?

Undergraduate students: 270 students have participated in the eight-month Coastal Fellows Program, sponsored by the partnership. 90% of these students have prepared and displayed scientific posters. 15-20% have gone on to present the posters at regional and national meetings. 10-15% of the students have become authors on papers or have published papers independently. We now have former Coastal Fellows calling to offer funding support and projects for current Coastal Fellows.

8. What have student participants done after they have left URI? Give examples, especially highlighting how the Partnership benefited the student.

Upon graduation, 85-90% of the Coastal Fellows move directly into graduate programs or into competitive professional positions. The partnership ensures that students have at least one research "product" to convey to potential employers or to graduate advisors. In addition, each student emerges with a resume that accurately reflects the professional involvements and research skills attained through the fellowship. Most important, our students build a network of internal and external contacts through the Fellowship. These individuals help our students to find their place upon graduation. As we have begun working with younger students, freshmen and sophomores, we have noticed that they tend to pursue a pattern of experiential learning throughout the remainder of their undergraduate careers. They either choose to continue with the fellowship program or they spread their wings and venture into the various NSF-funded research experiences for undergraduates or other similar programs.

9. What service contributions have arisen from Partnership activities, to the professional community, URI, or to the State of Rhode Island?

Service contributions: Many, if not most, of our Coastal Fellows are working in applied science on projects that directly affect the health and environment of our local communities. Sea Grant-funded Safe Boating Practices Project, salt marsh restoration projects, water quality monitoring, alternative septic system design in local communities, watershed nutrients, etc. Since this program is embedded in the Land Grant system, virtually all of the student projects and the associated faculty research are characterized as service to our community. That is what the Land Grant system does.

10. What does the Partnership need to become more effective?

More effective: We have made quite an impact on undergraduate education in the College of the Environment and Life Sciences and in other cells throughout the university. To become more effective, however, we need and have always needed more certainty about future prospects for supporting the partnership. We have also needed a system that recognizes the partnerships as an actual entity through which to track overhead, paperwork, student credit hours, etc. With a return on overhead and some funding tied to student credit hours, we could begin to stabilize our effort.

11. What changes to the Partnership program could be made to make it better?

Improvement: The partnerships are a wonderful vehicle for bringing together a wide spectrum of scholars and researchers to work on cross-disciplinary research. They are also marvelous incubators for mentoring our students. We have learned that the partnership effort takes an enormous amount of faculty time to grapple with the various disciplinary languages and assumptions that each person arrives at the table with. Somehow, the issue of faculty overload and divided allegiances needs to be addressed. Faculty need more time to be able to develop their collaborative research enterprises to their fullest potential. It would also be of great value to the faculty to be able to respond to some clear expectations of what constitutes an excellent partnership. We are all human and like to know that we are doing a good job of what is being asked. Morale in this partnership has suffered because of our uncertainty about whether we were and are on the right course.

12. For those Partnerships no longer receiving URI funding: Did the Partnership receive additional funds from the Provost after the initial grant expired to support student activities? How were those funds used?

No response.